Message-ID: <13707502.1075851018077.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:33:00 -0700 (PDT) From: steven.kean@enron.com To: jeffrey.keeler@enron.com Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron Europe concerning our position on Kyoto Cc: michael.terraso@enron.com, kelly.kimberly@enron.com, lauren.iannarone@enron.com, catherine.mckalip-thompson@enron.com, lisa.jacobson@enron.com, mark.palmer@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: michael.terraso@enron.com, kelly.kimberly@enron.com, lauren.iannarone@enron.com, catherine.mckalip-thompson@enron.com, lisa.jacobson@enron.com, mark.palmer@enron.com X-From: Steven J Kean X-To: Jeffrey Keeler X-cc: Michael Terraso, Kelly Kimberly, Lauren Iannarone, Catherine McKalip-Thompson, Lisa Jacobson, Mark Palmer X-bcc: X-Folder: \Steven_Kean_Oct2001_2\Notes Folders\Attachments X-Origin: KEAN-S X-FileName: skean.nsf I think Jeff should be the point person on putting the response together on this (and future air and climate change position inquiries). Jeff - please make sure you get the comments of all involved. Jeffrey Keeler 04/17/2001 05:02 PM To: Michael Terraso/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Kelly Kimberly/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT@ECT, Catherine McKalip-Thompson/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Lisa Jacobson/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron Europe concerning our position on Kyoto All: I would like to discuss how we might respond to this letter from Greenpeace, if at all. The letter is attached way at the bottom of this e-mail, and was received in several Enron European offices as a copy of what was sent to Jeff Skilling and other CEOs of major companies. I have not confirmed our receipt of such a letter from any of you, but am assuming it was delivered. I think we could respond in a very positive, constructive manner to Greenpeace, based on the statements we've already documented and the strategies we are developing. Lisa Jacobson and I are currently working on developing some tighter climate change and clean air "messages" that we can use in multiple areas ASAP -- upcoming Ken Lay speeches and interactions with the Administration, revising the Statement for the 2001 Corporate Responsibility Report, Enron Business articles and other internal uses, responses to environmental group inquiries and shareholder meeting Q&A, and use in everyday speeches and advocacy work. The Greenpeace questions are tricky, and set up no-win answers for the most part. I doubt they will get any direct answers to questions like: "Does your company support President Bush in his opposition to the protocol?" In my opinion, we can respond to Greenpeace without directly responding to these types of questions. Addressing Kyoto directly is a slippery slope -- its best to stick with the solution-oriented approach we've always taken. For this reason, I was a bit concerned to see in the e-mail chain below a characterization of Mark Palmer's statement on Kyoto (given to Jackie Gentile in London) -- "Enron has always taken the view that the Kyoto protocol was not a workable solution to dealing with CO2 emissions. However it is not the principles behind Kyoto that we take issue with, rather it is the vehicle that has been devised to deliver the results." I believe it is dangerous to make such statements for a number of reasons -- Greenpeace would absolutely beat us over the head with it, Friends of the Earth could step up its shareholder initiatives, etc. Also, this sets you up for a number of follow up questions that I don't think we have answers to, like: What about Kyoto is not workable? What would make it workable and would we help make it workable? If not Kyoto, what is Enron's preferred "vehicle?" I'd really rather stay with a constructive, solution-oriented approach and avoid reference to Kyoto altogether. I will talk with Kate Bauer in Enron Europe about this, but I think we need to decide on a global, corporate-wide response to Greenpeace. I would be happy to set up a quick conference call on the subject, or just field comments by e-mail -- whatever works best. Thoughts? Jeffrey Keeler Director, Environmental Strategies Enron Washington DC office - (202) 466-9157 Cell Phone (203) 464-1541 Lauren Iannarone@ECT 04/17/2001 11:20 AM To: Jeffrey.Keeler@enron.com cc: Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron Europe concerning our position on Kyoto FYI: I defer to you on this but assume we are in a good position to respond to Greenpeace. I assume you will discuss with Kate and Peter - let me know - thanks ---------------------- Forwarded by Lauren Iannarone/NY/ECT on 04/17/2001 11:37 AM --------------------------- Peter.Styles@enron.com on 04/17/2001 09:42:40 AM To: Kate.Bauer@enron.com cc: lauren.goldblatt@enron.com, kelly_kimberly@enron.net, Fiona.Grant@enron.com, Jackie.Gentle@enron.com, Stacey.Bolton@enron.com, Nailia.Dindarova@enron.com Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron Europe concerning our position on Kyoto Thanks Kate. Please keep Nailia Dindarova in my Brussels office and me copied on responses since I will be co-ordinating any pronouncements on this topic in Europe in policymakers' circles. For them neither the negativity nor the vagueness of the words you quote below (on which Mark and Jackie already know my views!) will be adequate. Kate Bauer@ENRON 17/04/2001 15:36 To: lauren.goldblatt@enron.com cc: kelly_kimberly@enron.net, Fiona Grant/LON/ECT@ECT, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron in the Netherlands and Spain re our position on Kyoto Lauren Further to my telephone message today, I would be grateful for your view on the approach we should be taking to the issue of Greenpeace sending letters to our European offices re: Kyoto. Several of our offices (Spain, Belgium, Netherlands) have received a local language version of the letter originally sent to Jeff Skilling, and other CEOs, on 5 April 2001. The email chain below gives an indication of what is in circulation. Greenpeace is expecting a response within the next week. Jackie Gentle has made me the point of contact in the PR department for this issue. We have discussed this issue briefly and we would support issuing an initial statement to acknowledge receipt of the letters, perhaps followed by a standardised, corporate- approved letter, but would like to ensure our approach is supported, and consistent with any actions, by Corporate. As some of the countries in which we operate have tangible "green" focused projects e.g. we have acquired a wind project in The Netherlands, it may be appropriate to allow such countries to personalise their response in local language. If we follow up an initial acknowledgement with a fuller response to Greenpeace's questions, I suggest we consider the following issues raised recently by Jackie Gentle: "In response to several requests for clarification, I have spoken with Mark Palmer who has provided the following information on Enron's stance regarding Kyoto: Enron has always taken the view that the Kyoto protocol was not a workable solution to dealing with CO2 emissions. However it is not the principles behind Kyoto that we take issue with, rather it is the vehicle that has been devised to deliver the results. We firmly believe that there is work to be done in reducing greenhouse gases and Enron has put in place a number of programs that have measurably reduced carbon dioxide as well as SO2 and Oxides of Nitrogen (Nox) By way of example .... emissions trading programs have been put in place where these can be implemented Enron is one of the largest developers of natural gas-fired power plants which produce about 50 percent less carbon dioxide than coal or oil-fired plants demand-side management programs through EES to reduce energy usage the Catalytica program focus on renewable-related projects At the current time there is no formal statement from Enron Corp on the Kyoto issue." Before we proceed, I would be grateful if you could contact me to share your views on this. Many thanks. Best regards Kate Kate Bauer Manager Public Relations and Communications ext: 32495 ---------------------- Forwarded by Kate Bauer/EU/Enron on 17/04/2001 14:14 --------------------------- Nailia Dindarova@ECT 17/04/2001 13:28 To: Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT@ECT, Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Julie Green/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fiona Grant/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, Hans-mart Groen/Enron@EUEnronXgate, Ross Sankey/LON/ECT@ECT, Kate Bauer/EU/Enron@Enron, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Teun Van Biert/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Greenpeace letters to Enron in the Netherlands and Spain re our position on Kyoto (Document link: Kate Bauer) We have now recieved a letter from Greenpeace Belgium here in the Brussels office (please see attached). (See attached file: Greenpeace Belgium_Letter April 13 2001.tif) Peter Styles 17/04/2001 11:59 To: Stacey Bolton/Corp/Enron@Enron, Rob Bradley/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Nailia Dindarova/LON/ECT@ECT, Alfredo Huertas/LON/ECT@ECT, Teun Van Biert/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Greenpeace letters to Enron in the Netherlands and Spain re our position on Kyoto As I was saying in my e-mail a few minutes ago...................... ---------------------- Forwarded by Peter Styles/LON/ECT on 17/04/2001 12:01 --------------------------- Eva Hoeffelman 17/04/2001 12:52 To: Jackie Gentle/LON/ECT@ECT, Axel_Pothof@nl.bm.com cc: Julie Green/LON/ECT@ECT, Peter Styles/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Fiona Grant/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew Morrison/LON/ECT@ECT, Hans-mart Groen/Enron@EUEnronXgate, Ross Sankey/LON/ECT@ECT, Kate Bauer/EU/Enron@Enron, Paul Hennemeyer/LON/ECT@ECT, Teun Van Biert/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Greenpeace letter to Enron in the Netherlands re our position on Kyoto Please find below the Greenpeace letter our Dutch office received today (as has our Spanish office). Their deadline for our answers to their questions is before 26 April. I am asking our PR agency in the NL to translate the letter asap. In the mean time, I will wait for direction on our official corporate response on this issue and then discuss suitability or possible adaptation for the Dutch market or for this letter in particular. I have advised Hans-Mart to make sure all employees in the Dutch office do not reply to any calls or queries re the above ubject and to refer them to me. Thanks Eva ---------------------- Forwarded by Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT on 04/17/2001 11:36 AM --------------------------- London Fax System2 04/17/2001 11:26 AM To: Eva Hoeffelman/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: New fax received (Likely sender: +31 0 206541966). You have received a new fax from +31 0 206541966 The image contains 1 page(s). - Greenpeace Belgium_Letter April 13 2001.tif